A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the ...

Synchrony and diachrony of English periphrastic causatives: a cognitive perspective

A thesis submitted to the University of Manchester for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in the Faculty of Arts

2003

Willem B. Hollmann School of English and Linguistics

Contents

CONTENTS

2

ABBREVIATIONS

5

ABSTRACT

6

DECLARATION

7

COPYRIGHT STATEMENT

8

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

9

CHAPTER 1. INTRODUCTION

10

1. Preliminaries

10

1.1 Methodology

14

1.1.1 General methodology

14

1.1.2 Importance of statistics: a case study

15

2. Cognitive linguistics and construction grammar

17

3. Models of causation

22

3.1 Cole (1983)

22

3.2 Song (1996)

24

3.3 Dixon (2000)

27

3.4 Talmy (1976, 1985, 1988, 2000a, 2000b)

28

CHAPTER 2. PERIPHRASTIC CAUSATIVE MAKE: A CASE OF

CONSTRUCTIONAL POLYSEMY?

33

1. Preliminaries

33

2. Previous scholarship on the meaning(s) of periphrastic causative make 34

2.1 Scholarship neutral vis-?-vis the status of the different uses

35

2.2 Scholarship in favour of a polysemy view

36

2.3 Scholarship in favour of a monosemy view

40

3. Psychological status of the 2 uses

40

3.1 The classification of the OED, Terasawa and Giv?n

41

3.1.1 Causee agentivity

41

3.1.2 Causee resistance

44

3.2 The neutral v. `force' distinction from a syntactic and typological perspective 47

3.2.1 Syntax

48

3.2.2 Typology

52

3.2.2.1 Song

54

3.2.2.2 Dixon

55

3.2.2.2.1 The relevant parameters

55

2

3.2.2.2.2 Usefulness of Dixon's parameters

56

3.2.2.3 Cole

58

3.2.3 Diachrony

61

4. Concluding remarks

63

CHAPTER 3. THE RISE OF PERIPHRASTIC CAUSATIVE HAVE: A CASE OF

FORM-FUNCTION REANALYSIS

67

1. Introduction

67

2. Historical and semantic plausibility of the reconstruction

68

2.1 Relative chronology: standard handbooks and corpus evidence

70

2.2 Semantic similarity (and difference)

73

3. The emergence of causative [NP1-HAVE-NP2-STEM/INF] as form-function

reanalsyis

82

3.1 The context in which the change occurred

82

3.2 Availability of other causative constructions as a facilitating factor

89

4. Concluding remarks

90

CHAPTER 4. THE RISE OF PERIPHRASTIC CAUSATIVE GET: A USAGE-

BASED ACCOUNT

92

1. Introduction

92

2. Baron (1977); Gronemeyer (1999)

93

2.1 Baron

93

2.2 Gronemeyer

95

2.3 Problematic data for Gronemeyer

99

3. Alternative reconstruction: a usage-based account

102

3.1 Get-based constructions

105

3.2 Other periphrastic causatives

109

3.2.1 Chronology

111

3.2.2 Formal and functional similarity

113

3.2.3 Frequency and dialectal considerations

115

3.2.4 High-level schematic constructions

119

3.3 Stative and dynamic infinitives

120

4. Concluding remarks

122

CHAPTER 5. SYNCHRONY AND DIACHRONY OF INFINITIVAL

COMPLEMENTS IN PERIPHRASTIC CAUSATIVES

124

1. Introduction

124

2. Previous scholarship on infinitival complementation in English causatives 127

2.1 PDE: Mittwoch (1990), Dixon (1991), Duffley (1992)

127

2.2 Diachrony/history: Fischer (1992b, 1995, 1996, 1997a, 1997b) and sources 132

2.3 Giv?n (1980)

143

3

3. The extended binding hierarchy 1: synchronic distribution of the infinitival

modes

146

3.1 Extending the binding hierarchy for implicative causatives

146

3.1.1 Directness

147

3.1.2 Sphere of control

149

3.1.3 Causation type

150

3.1.4 Punctuality

152

3.2 Scoring the causatives

153

4. The extended binding hierarchy 2: diachronic regulation of the infinitival

complements

158

4.1 How does the extended binding hierarchy (help) explain the regulation process?

158

4.2 Why did the change happen when it did?

168

5. A brief note on infinitival strategy in the passive

172

6. Concluding remarks

175

CHAPTER 6. THE SEMANTICS OF CAUSATIVES: EVIDENCE FROM

PASSIVISATION

176

1. Introduction

176

2. Methodology

180

2.1 The corpus

180

2.2 The parameters

182

2.2.1 Hopper & Thompson (1980)

182

2.2.2 Modifications

185

2.3 The scoring system

194

3. Results

195

3.1 Modality

196

3.2 Aspect

196

3.3 Causality

197

3.4 Individuation of O

197

3.5 Directness

198

4. Implications: universals of causatives

198

4.1 Aspect

198

4.2 Causality

201

4.3 Individuation of O

209

4.4 Directness

210

5. Concluding remarks

212

CHAPTER 7. CONCLUDING REMARKS

217

APPENDIX: TEXTS DOWNLOADED FROM THE ON-LINE CME

220

REFERENCES

222

4

Abbreviations

Below I list the abbreviations used in the interlinear morpheme translations. They are based on the ones used in the Framework for Descriptive Grammars project (Bernard Comrie, Bill Croft, Christian Lehmann and Dietmar Zaefferer) in 1991. For more information see e.g. Croft (2001:xxiv).

1 2 3 ACC ALL CAUS CONJ DAT DEF DO ERG HAB IND INST IO LGR M NEG NOM NPRS NPx' OBL PST PURP SG SUBJ

First Person Second Person Third Person Accusative Allative Causative Conjunction Dative Definite Direct Object Ergative Habitual Indicative Instrumental Indirect Object Level-pitch Grade Masculine Negative Nominative Nonpresent Referent of NPx Oblique Past Purposive Singular Subjunctive

5

 ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download